Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • X

    Uploaded by

    David
    1 views22 pages
    x

    Original Title

    x

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    x

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    1 views22 pages

    X

    Uploaded by

    David
    x

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 22
    ‘The Screen and the User Contemporary human-computer interfaces offer radical new possibilities for are and communication. Viecual reality allows us co cravel chrough nonex iscene chree-cimensional spaces. A computer monitor connected to @ net~ work hecomes a window chrough which we can enter places thousands of miles away. Finally, with che help of a mouse of a video camera, a compu ter can be transformed into an intelligent being capable of engaging us in dialogue VR, celepresence, and interactivicy are made possible by the recent cech nology of the digital computer. However, they are made real bya much older technology —the sereen. Icis by looking ata screen—a flat, rectangular sur face positioned ae some distance fom the eyes—that the user experiences theillusion of navigating chrough vircual spaces, of being physically present somewhere else or of being hailed by che computer itself, If computers have become common presence in our culture only in the lase decade, the sereen, fon the other hand, has been used to present visual information for cet turies—from Renaissance painting co twentieth-cencury cinema, ‘Today, coupled with che computer, che screen is rapidly becoming che main means of accessing any kind of information, be i still images, moving Images, ortexe. Weare already using ic co read the daily newspaper; co wacch ‘movies; co communicate wich co-workers, relatives, and friends; and, most importance, co work. We may debate whether our society isa society of spec- tacle of of simulation, but, undoubtedly, itis a society of the screen. What are the different stages of che screen's history? What are the relationships be- tween the physical space where the viewer is located, her body, and the screen space? What are the ways in which computer displays both continue and challenge the cradition of the screen?®* A Screen's Genealogy Let us stare with the definition ofa screen. The visual culeure of the modeen period, feom paincing to cinema, is characterized by an intriguing phenom- cenon—the existence of anatber viral space, another three-dimensional ‘world enclosed by a frame and sieuaed inside our normal space. The fame separates two absolueely diferent spaces that somehow coexise. This phe- ‘nomenon is what defines the screen in the mose general sens, of, a6 Iwill eal ic, che “elassical screen” Whac are he properties ofa classical screen? It isa fla, rectangular sur- face. Te is intended for frontal viewing—as opposed to a panorama for in- sance, Ie exists in our normal space, the space of our body, and acts a8 a window ineo another space. This other space, the space of representation, typically has a scale differene from the scale of our normal space. Defined in this way, a screen describes equally well a Renaissance painting (recall Al- bereis formulation referred to above) and a modern computer display. Even ‘proportions have not changed in five ceneuries; they are similar fora eypic fifceenth-ceneury painting, a film screen, and a compucer screen, In this respect it is not accidental chat the very names of the two main formats of 51. My analysis ere focuses on che continites Between she computer sercen and preceding sepsesencationl conventions and technologies. For alvemacive eadings tha tae upehe de ences berween the two, see the exellenarils by Vivian Sobehack, “Nesala fr a Digital (Object: Regses on Une Quickening of QuickTime” in Millamiie Fila Jura! 4-23, No. 34 (Fall 1999) an Noman Bryson, "Summer 1999 ac TATE, Gallery, 413 ‘West Ids Stet, New York Ci: Bryon writes: Though che [compute] sre isable vo pees lable ro cenca scenngcaphic depeh, cis obviously unlike the Alertian or Renaissance windows is su ‘ace never vanishes befor the imaginary dep beind ite never tly opens nc depth Bue the PCscreen dos noe behave like the modemist image the. teannot foreground the mate- ‘alty of he surface (pigments on canvas) since i has no materiality speak of, ee than ‘the pay of sifting lighe” Both Sobchack and Bryson tess the difference between the tad ‘onal image Fame an she muliple windows ofa computer screen "Basically writes Beyon, “the whole order ofthe fame is abolished, replaced by the ode of superimposition ocling Tre Imeroce computer displays poine co wo genres of painting: A horizontal formats e- ferved co as "landscape mode,” whereas the vertical format is referred to as “porerait mode” ‘A hundred years ago new type ofseren, which I will eall he “dynamic screen,” became popular. This new type retains all the properties ofa class- cal screen while adding something new: It can display an image changing overtime. Ths isthe screen of cinema, television, video. The dynamic screen also brings wieh iea certain eelationship between the image and che specea- tor—a cereain sisving regi, so vo speak. This relationship is already im- plicit the classical screen, but now ie Fully surfaces. A screen's image strives for complete illusion and visual plenitude, while the viewer is asked to sus- pend disbelief and co idencify with che image. Alchough the screen in ral- ity is only a window of limited dimensions positioned inside che physical space ofthe viewer, the viewer is expected to concentrate completely on what she sees inthis window, focusing her attention on the representation and dis regarding the physical space outside. This viewing regime is made possible by the fact thac che singular image, whether a painting, movie screen, or tel~ vision sereen, completely fill the screen. This is why we are so annoyed in a movie theater when the projected image does not precisely coincide wieh the screen's boundaries: [e disrupts the illusion, making us conscious of what exists outside the representation.** Rather chan being a neucral medium of presenting information, the screen isagagressive. It functions o filter, to soe ou, to ake over, rendering nonexistene whatever is outside its frame. OF course, the degree of this fil- tering varies beeween cinema viewing and celevision viewing. In cinema viewing, the viewer is asked to merge completely with the screen's space. In television viewing (as it was practiced in the twentieth century), the screen is smaller, lights are on, conversation between viewers isallowed, and the act of viewing is often integrated with other daily activities. Sell, overall this viewing regime has remained stable—until recently. 532. Thedegre to whicha flame that ats asa boundary between the wo spaces isemphasized seems ta be proportional tothe degree of ilentibation expected om the views. Thus cine ema, where he idencificaion i mose intense, the fame a a sept objct doesnot exis at all-—the seven simply ends a ts boundtier—wheres both n pinting and slevsion the framing is mach more pronounce. chapter 2 ‘This stability has been challenged by the arrival ofthe computer screen. (On the one hand, rather han showing.a single image, a computer screen typ ically displays a number of coexisting windows. Indeed, ehe coexistence of a number of overlapping windows isa Fundamental principle of the modeen GUL No single window completely dominates the viewer's atcention. In this sense, che possibility of simulcaneously observing a few images that co- exist within one screen can be compared with the phenomenon of zapping — the quick switching of eelevision channels that allows the viewer to follow ‘more than progeam.* In both instances, the viewer no longer concentrates fon a single image. (Some television sets enable a second channel 0 be ‘watched within a smaller window positioned in a corner ofthe main screen. Pethaps future TV sets will adopt the window metaphor of a computer) A ‘window interface has more ro do with modem graphic design, which ereats 4 page asa collection of differene but equally imporeane blocks of data such as ext, images, and graphic elements, chan with the cinematic screen ‘On the other hand, with VR, the screen disappears altogether. VR typi- cally usesa head-mounted display whose images completely fill the viewer's visual field. No longeris che viewer looking at rectangular, fae surface from 1 certain distance, a window into another space. Now she is fully situated within this ocher space. Or, more precisely, we can say thatthe ewo spaces— the real, physical space and the vircual, simulated space—coincide. ‘The virtual space, previously confined «© a painting or a movie screen, now completely encompasses the real space, Froneality,receangular surface, dif- ference in scale are all gone. The sereen has vanished. Both sieuations—window incerface and VR—disrupt the viewing re- szime that characterizes the historical period of the dynamic screen. ‘This regime, based on an identification of viewer and screen image, reached its culmination in the cinema, which goes to an extreme to enable this identi fication (ehe bigness of the sercen, the darkness of ehe surrounding space). “Thus, ehe era of the dynamic screen that began with cinema is now end- ing, And ic is chis disappearance ofthe screen—its splitcing into many win- dows in window interface, its complere takeover of the visual field in 53, Here Lagre with he prllel suggested hy Anatoly Prokhoro between window incfice 2nd montage ia cinema Tre Imeroce ‘VR—thatallows us today to recognize ic asa culeural category and begin co trace its history. ‘The origins of ehe cinema's screen are well known, We can trace its emer- ence to the popular spectacles and entertainments of che eighteenth and nineteenth centuries: magic lantern shows, phantasmagoria eidophusikon, panorama, diorama, 2oopraxiscope shows, and so on. Te public was ready for cinema, and when it finally appeared, ic was a huge public event, Not by accident, che “invention” of cinema was claimed by at least a dozen individ uals from a half-dozen couneries."* ‘The origin of the computer screen is a different story. Ie appears in the _midale of ehis century, bue ie does not become a public presence until much later; and ies history has not yet been written, Both ofthese facts are related to the contexe in which i emerged: As with all rhe other elements of mod- crn human-computer interface, the computer screen was developed for mile itary use. Its history has ¢o do noe with public entertainment but with milicary surveillance. The history of moxern surveillance technologies begins with phocogrea- phy. With che advene of photography came an interest in using it for acral surveillance. Félix Tournachon Nadar, one of the most eminent photogea- pers ofthe nineteenth century, succeeded in exposing a photographic plate at 262 feet over Bidvre, France in 1858. He was soon approached by the French Army co attempt photo reconnaissance but rejected the offer. In 1882, unmanned photo balloons were already in the ar; a Lieele later, they "were joined by photo rockets both in France and in Germany: The only in novation of World War I was to combine aerial cameras with a superior ly- ing plactorm—the aieplane.* Radar became the next major surveillance technology. Massively em- ployed in World War II, ie provided important advantages over photogea- phy. Previously, military commanders had to waie until pilots reeuenedl from surveillance missions and film was developed. The inevitable delay between time of surveillance and delivery ofthe finished image limited photography’ usefulness because by the time a phorograph was produced, enemy positions 54, For hese origins sen for instance, C. W. Ceram, Arc of te Cina (New York: Hae= coure Brace and Wold, 1965) 35. Beaumont Newall, Aide Camere (New York: Hastings Howse, 1969), chapter 2 could have changed. However, with radar, imaging became instantaneous, and this delay was eliminated. The effectiveness of radar had to do with a new means of displaying an imaye—a new eype ofsereen. Consider che imaging eechnologies of photography and film. The photo- graphic image isa permanent imprine coreesponding to single referent — ‘whatever is in frone of the lens when the photograph is taken. It also corresponds to Limited time of observation—the rime of exposure. Film is based on the same principles. A film sequence, composed ofa numberof sil images, represents the sum of referents and the sum of exposure times of these individual images. In either case, che image is fixed once and for all ‘Therefore the screen can only show past events. Wich radar, we se for ee frst time the mass employment (television is founded on the same principle but its mass employment comes later) of a fundamentally new eype of seen, a screen chat gradually comes to dominate modern visual culture—video monitor, computer screen, inseeumene dis- play. What is new aboue such a screen is that its image can change in real time, reflecting changes in the referent, whether the position of an object in space (radar), any alteraion in visible reality (live video) or changing data in the computers memory (computer screen). The image can be continually updated in ral tine. This is ehe thied type of sereen after classic and dy- snamic—the screen of realtime. ‘The radar sereen changes, cracking the referent. Buc while it appears chat the element of cime dela, always present in he technologies of military sur- veillance, is eliminated, in face, time enters the real-time sereen in a new ‘way. In olde, phocographic technologies, all parts ofan image are exposed simultaneously, whereas now the image is produced chough sequential scanning —circular in the case of radar, horizonal inthe case of clevision “Therefor, che dfferene parts ofthe image correspond to different moments in time. ln this respect, a radar image is more similar to an audio record since consecutive moments in time become ciecular tracks on a surface." 36. This is moce than a concepeual similar. Inthe late 1920s, John H. Baed invented phomoision” he fist method or the recoting and playback ofa cevsionsigal, The sg al was recorded on Edisons phonograph record by a proces ery similar ro hat of making an suio recording. Baird named his recording machine the “phonoxcope” Alber Abramson, Elecronc Maton ces (Univesity of California Press, 1985), 41-42. Tre Imeroce ‘What chis means is chac the image, in a tradicional sense, no longer ex: ists! And icis only by habicchac we still refer co what we see on the real-time sereen as “images.” It is only because the scanning is fast enough andl because, sometimes, the referent remains static, rhae we see what looks like a serie image. Yer, such an image is no longer the norm, but the exception of a more general, new kind of representation for which we do not yet have a term. ‘The principles and rechnology of radar were worked out independently by scientists in the United States, England, France, and Germany during the 1930s, After the beginning of the War, however, only the US. had ehe re- sources necessary co continue radar development. In 1940, ae MIT, a team of scientists was assembled co work in the Radiation Laboratory, or the “Rad. Lab,” as it came to be called. The purpose of the lab was radar research and production. By 1943, the "Rad Lab” occupied 115 acres of oor space; it had the largese telephone switchboard in Cambridge and employed four chou- sand people.” Next to photogeaphy, radar provided a superior way co gather informa- tion about enemy locations. Infact, it provided too much information, more information ehan one person could deal wich. Historical footage from the carly days of the war shows a central command room with a large, able-size ‘map of Britain.* Small pieces of cardboard in the form of planes are posi tioned on the map to show the locations of actual German bombers. A few senior officers scrutinize the map. Meanwhile, women inarmy uniforms con- seantly change the location of the cardboard pieces by moving them wich long sticks as information is transmitted from dozens of radae stations.” ‘Was there a more effective way to process and display information gath- cred by radar? The computer screen, as well as most other key principles and technologies of the modeen human-computer interface—interactive con- ‘ol, algorithms for 3-D wireframe graphics, bie-mapped graphies—was de- veloped as.a way of solving ehis problem. ‘The research again took place at MIT. The Radiation Laboratory was dismantled after the end of the war, but soon the Air Force created another 57. Esher of Wor (Boston: WIGBH Boston, 1989), videoape 38. Ibid. 59. Ibid. chapter 2 secret laboratory in its place—Lincoln Laboratory. The purpose of Lincoln Laboratory was to work on human factors and new display technologies for SAGE—"Semi-Automatic Ground Environment,” a command center t0 control the U.S. air defenses established in the mid-1950s.® Historian of computer technology Paul Edwards writes thae SAGE's job “was co link together radar installations around the USA\s perimeter, analyze and is expret their signals, and direct manned interceptor jets toward the in coming bee. Te was to be a coral system, one whose ‘human components’ were fully incegeated into the mechanized circuit of detection, decision and response." ‘The creation of SAGE and the development of an interactive human- computer interfice were largely che resule ofa particular military doccrine. In the 1950s, che American military thoughe that a Soviet ateack on the US. ‘would entail sending large number of bombers simultancously. Therefore, ic seemed necessary to create a center that could receive information from all US. radar stations, erack che large number of enemy bombers, and coor dlnace a counceractack. The compucer screen and other components of the modern human-computer interfice owe their existence to this particular miliary idea. (As someone who was born inthe Soviee Union and now works con ehe history of new media in the United Seates, I find this bie of history ceuly fascinating.) An arly version of the center was called “the Cape Cod network,” since it received information from radars situated along the coas of New England "The center operated right out of the Barta Building on the MIT campus. Each of eighty-two Aie Force officers monitored his own computer display, ‘which showed the outline of the New England Coast and the location of key radars, Whenever an officer noticed a doc indicating a moving plane, he 40, On SAGE, see he excellent social hitcory of ely computing by Pal Edwards, The Chad Wield Computer ad the Plies of DivsarsinCald Wr Amoi (Cambridge, Mase: MIT Pres, 1996), Fora shore summary ofhis argument, ee Pasl Edwards, "The Closed Wold: Syaems Discourse, Miliary Policy and Poet-World War I US. Historical Consciousness,” in Cong Wield The Miltary lfrmation Sci, Les Levidow and Kevin Robins (London: Free As sociation Books, 1989). Se also Howard Rheingold, Vial Reality (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1991), 68-93 AL. Eadward, "The Closed Woe” (1989), 142. Tre Imeroce ‘would cell che computer to follow the plane. To do this, the officer simply hhad co touch the dot with a special “light pen." ‘Thus, the SAGE system contained all the main elements of the modeen ‘human-computer interface. The light pen, designed in 1949, can be consid cred a precursor of the contemporary mouse. More importanely, at SAGE, the screen came co be used nor only to display information in realtime, as in radar and television, but also to give commands co the computer, Rather than acting solely as: means of displaying an image of reality, che sereen be- came a vehicle for directly affecting reality. Using the technology developed for SAGE, Lincoln researchers created a number of computer graphics programs chat relied on the screen as a means of inputting and ourputting informacion from a computer. These included programs for displaying brain waves (1957), simulating planet and gravi- tational activity (1960), and creating 2-D drawings (1958). The most well-known of these programs was “Sketchpad.” Designed in 1962 by Ivan Sutherland, a graduate student supervised by Claude Shannon, it widely publicized the idea of interactive computer graphics. Wich Skerchpad, a hu- rman operator could create graphics directly ona computer screen by touch ing the sereen with a light pen. Sketchpad exemplified a new paradigm of inceracting with compucers: By changing something on the screen, the op- erator changed something in the computer's memory. The real-time screen became interactive his, in shore, is the history ofthe bieth ofthe computer screen. Buc even before the computer screen became widely used, new paradigm emerged — the simulation of an interactive three-dimensional environment without a screen, In 1966, Ivan Sutherland and his colleagues began research on the prototype of VR. The work was cosponsored by the Advanced Research Proj- ects Agency (ARPA) and he Office of Naval Research. “The fundamental idea behind the thrce-dimensional display is eo pres- ent ehe user with a perspective image which changes as he moves,” wrote 42. “Retrospectives If The Harly Years in Compucee Graphics at MIT, Lincoln Lab, and Har- GRAPH '89 Panel Preis (New York The Association for Compating Max chines, 1989), 22-24 43, Tid. 42-54 44. Rheingold, Virtual Reali 105, war in I chapter 2 Sutherland in 1968. The computer cracked the posicion of che viewer's head and adjusted che perspective of the computer graphic image accord- ingly. The display itself consisted of ewo six-inch-long monitors mounted next to the temples. They projected an image that appeared superimposed over the viewers field of vision, ‘The screen disappeared. Ie had completely taken over the visual field. “The Screen and ehe Body | have presented one possible genealogy of che modern computer screen, In my genealogy, the computer secen represents an interactive type a subtype ime type, which isa subtype ofthe dynamic type, which isa sub- type ofthe classical rype. My discussion of these types relied on two ideas Firs, che idea of temporality—the classical sereen displays a static, perma of the real rene image; the dynamic screen displays a moving image of the pase; and finally, the real-rime screen shows the present. Second, the relationship between the space ofthe viewer and the space of representation (I defined the screen as a window into the space of representation that itself exists in our normal space). Let us now look at the screen’ history from another angle—the relation- ship beeween the screen and the body of the viewer. This is how Roland Barthes describes the screen in “Diderot, Brecht, Eisenstein,” written in 1973: Representation is noc defined direcely by imitation: even ifone gets tid of notions of the “eal,” of the “vaisemblable,” of che “copy.” there wll sil e represencation for aslong asa subjece (author, eader, spectator or voyeur cast his gaze towards hori- zon on which he cuts out a base of triangle, his eye (or his mind) forming the apex. ‘The “Organon of Representation” (which is today becoming possible to write be- cause ehete ate incimations of smshing ei) will have a its dual foundation the so: igory of ehe act of cucing out [dkowpage and he unity of che subject of action ‘The scene, the picture, the shoe, the cut-out rectangle, here we have che very cndi- tion thac allows so conceive theater, painting, cinema literature all those arts, cht is, other than music and which could be called diptrie arts. 45. Quoted in ibid, 104 46, Roland Buches, “Dideto, Beech, Eisenstein,” in Imag! Te, rans, Stephen Heath (New York: Fara, Strats, aed Gira, 1977), 69-70. Tre Imeroce For Barthes, che screen becomes an all-encompassing concepe that covers the functioning of even non-visual representation lireracure), although he does rmakean appeal toa particular visual model of linear perspective. Atany rate, his concepe encompasses all the types of representational apparatuses I have discussed: painting, film, television, radar, and computer display. In each of these, reality is cut by che rectangle ofa screen; “a pure cut-out segment with clearly defined edges, irreversible and incorruptible; everything that sur- rounds ici banished into nothingness, remains unnamed, while everything thar ie admits within ies field is promoted ineo essence, into light, into view"? This ace of cutting reality into a sign and nothingness simulea- neously doubles the viewing subject, who now exists in ewo spaces: the fa miliar physical space of her real body and the virtual space of an image ‘wichin che screen. This split comes to the surface with VR, buc it already ex- ists in paineing and other dioptric arts. ‘What is the price the subject pays forthe mastery of che world, focused and unified by ehe screen? ‘The Dranghtsman’s Contract, a 1982 film by Pecer Greenaway, concerns an architectural draftsman hired co produce a set of drawings of a country house. The draughtsman employs a simple drawing tool consis square grid. Throughoue the film, we repeatedly see the draughesmanis face through the grid, which looks like prison bars. Ie sas ifehe subjece who at- tempts to catch the world, immobilizing and fixing it within che represen- ‘ational apparatus (here, perspectival drawing), i erapped by the apparatus himself. The subject is imprisoned. Take this image asa metaphor for what appears to be a general tendency of the Western screen-based representational apparatus. In this radition, che body must be fixed in space ifthe viewer is to see the image atall. From Re- naissance monocular perspective to modern cinema, from Kepler's camera ng of a “obscura to nineteeneh-cencury camera lucida, che body has to remain still" 4. thi, 48. Although in che following I discos the immobility ofthe subject of screen in she con- exe ofthe history of eepesenaton, we can also relate this condition tothe history af com munication, In ancient Greece, communication was understood as an oral isle beeen people Ic was also assumed chat physical movement stimulated dialogue and the proces of ‘thinking. Aristotle and his popils walked around while discussing philosophical poblems. In chapter 2 ‘The imprisonment of che body takes place on both the conceptual and ic eral levels; both kinds of imprisonment already appear with che fist screen apparatus, Albert's perspectival window, which, according to many inter preters of linear perspective, presenes the world as seen by a singular eye— scatic, unblinking, and fixated. As described by Norman Bryson, perspective “followed the logic of the Gaze rather than the Glance, thus producing a visual take chat was ecernalized, reduced ro one “point of view’ and disem- Doxlied™® Bryson argues that “the gaze ofthe painter arrests the flux of phe- nomena, contemplates che visual field from a vantage poine outside the mobility of duration, in an eternal moment of disclosed presence.”* Corse spondingly, the world, as sen by chis immobile, static, and atemporal Gaze, which belongs more to. statue than a living body, becomes equally immo- bile, eeified, fixated, cold and dead. Referring to Diirer’s famous prine of draftsman drawing a nude through a screen of perspectival threads, Martin Jay notes thae “a reifying male look” eurns “its targets into stone”; conse- quently, “the marmoreal nude is drained ofits capacity to arouse desire” Similarly, John Berger compares Alberci’s window to “a safe lec intoa wall, safe inco which the visible has been deposited."* And in The Draughtsman't Conract, the draughtsman, time and again, ries cocliminate all mocion, any sign of life, from the scenes he is rendering. ‘With perspectival machines, che imprisonment of the subject also hap- pens ina literal sense. From the onsec of the adaptation of perspective, artists and draftsmen artempeed to aid the laborious manual process of creating per spectival images, and between the sixteench and nineteenth ceneuries vari- cous “perspectival machines” were constructed.” By the fise decades of the ‘the Middle Ages, a shift occured from dialogue between subjects o communication becween subject and an information storge device, shat a book. Aredeval book chained soa table cam be considered a procursor othe screen chat “fixes” its subject in space. 49,_ As summatied by Marin Jay, “opie Regimes of Mserity” in Von and Visual el Hal Foster (Sarl: Bay Pes, 1988),7. 50. Quoeed in bi, 7. 51. Ibid, 8 52. Quoeed in bid, 9 53. Forasurey of pespetival instruments, see Mastin Ker, Ti Scae4f An (New Haven Yale University Press, 1990), 167-220, Tre Imeroce sixteench century, Direr had described a number of such machines.** Many varieties were invented, bue regardless of the eype, the artist had ro remain immobile chroughout the process of drawing. Along with perspectival machines, a whole range of optical apparacuses was in use, particularly for depiccing landscapes and conducting copograph- ical surveys. The mosc popular optical apparacus was the camera obscuta.>> Camera obscura literally means “dark chamber,” and was founded on the premise that if rays of light from an object or a scene pass through a small aapereure, they will cross and reemenge on the othe side to form an image on screen. In order for the image co become visible, however, “i is necessary thac che screen be placed in a chamber in which light levels are considerably lower than those around che object." Thus, in one of the earliest depictions of the camera obscura, in Kircher’s Ars magna Lacis et umbrae (Rome, 1649), wwe see the subject enjoying the image inside a einy room, oblivious to che face chat he has had co imprison himself inside this “dark chamber” in order to see the image on the screen, Later, a smaller tent-type camera obscura—a movable prison, so 0 speak—became popular, Ie consisted of a small tent mounted on a cripod, ‘wich a revolving reflector and lens a its apex. Having positioned himself in- side the tene, which provided the necessary darkness, the draftsman would then spend hours meticulously tracing the image projected by the lens Farly photography continued the crend toward the imprisonment of the subject and the object of representation. During phorography’s firse decades, exposure times were quite long. The daguerreotype process, for instance, re

    You might also like